[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: The GPL and Patents: ROFL

From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: The GPL and Patents: ROFL
Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2010 16:00:10 -0000
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux)

RJack <> writes:

> On 8/19/2010 11:57 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
>> Hyman Rosen wrote:
>>> On 8/19/2010 11:39 AM, RJack wrote:
>>>> No court case is required:
>>> Is that like "show me the settlement agreements"?
>> Not at all stupid Hyman.
> Alex, Hyman's not stupid -- he is playing deliberate rhetorical games.
> "17 USC ยง 102. Subject matter of copyright: In general.
> (b) In no case does copyright protection for an original work of
> authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of
> operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in
> which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work."
> So...
> "In no case does copyright protection... extend to... *regardless of the
> form* in which it is described... or embodied in such work."

Sure.  But the form in which it is described is, individually,
copyrightable material.  You can express the same idea in 10 different
ways, and the idea is not protected by copyright.  But the 10 different
ways are.

> Hyman says that the statute is *not true*.

Not at all.

> Hyman is telling Congress and you and me that copyright protection
> *does* extend to works that embody a patentable idea in source code
> form. End of story.

You are getting more and more clueless the more you read.  With sane
people, it should be the other way round.

David Kastrup

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]